Electric Rex
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://australianaviation.com.au/20...outes-in-2024/
Rex will trial the use of planes with retrofitted electric engines on short regional flights of under one hour as soon as 2024.
According to the airline’s deputy chairman John Sharp, one of Rex’s 34-seat Saab 340s – retrofitted with an electric and hydrogen-powered MagniX engine – will be used to trial the technology on short routes such as Adelaide-Mount Gambier.
“We will be doing trials in 2024, with a real aircraft, where we’ll swap out the existing engine, which burns jet fuel,” Sharp told the ABC. “And we’ll put in an electric motor that will be supported by a combination of both batteries and hydrogen.”
According to the airline’s deputy chairman John Sharp, one of Rex’s 34-seat Saab 340s – retrofitted with an electric and hydrogen-powered MagniX engine – will be used to trial the technology on short routes such as Adelaide-Mount Gambier.
“We will be doing trials in 2024, with a real aircraft, where we’ll swap out the existing engine, which burns jet fuel,” Sharp told the ABC. “And we’ll put in an electric motor that will be supported by a combination of both batteries and hydrogen.”
Interesting. I guess the MaginX engine is scalable, but they currently show an 800hp version as their largest. Does anyone here understand the energy losses in hydrogen fuel cells? Is there a practical limit to how large they can be?
Modifying a SAAB to fly lower and slower with less payload and reduced range does not add up to an economical proposition. Development, build and certification costs would also have to be amortized in calculating a profitable short sector fare which would far exceed market acceptance. Short sector routes from capital cities would be impractical with traffic holding and wx. requirements inhibiting utilisation as there is no ability to trade payload for fuel. Add to that limited alternates (ports with charging facilities) and slow turnrounds unless fast charging and or battery change is available would further reduce the aeroplane's ability to meet high frequency high utilisation short sector demand. Alan Joyce is correct, electric powered RPT a/c are decades from reality. Happy to be contradicted by those with experience and qualifications in a/c manufacture certification and regional ops,
At this stage it is virtue signalling, as already suggested. Since Rex is allergic to advertising, this might be a ploy for free press coverage.
Currently it costs about US $1.10/kg of Jet A-1, Hydrogen is about $6/kg. H2 has around 300% more energy/kg, so the delta isn’t that big, and solar will only close the gap. Still not seeing how to build cryo tanks (fuel temp circa -275°). Still not understanding how big the fuel cells have to be to make enough electricity to run at cruise, assuming batteries will provide take-off power.
I am all in on the leftie agenda of reducing the carbon footprint. Just not seeing it for aviation, at least not where almost all the Jet A-1 is consumed.
Currently it costs about US $1.10/kg of Jet A-1, Hydrogen is about $6/kg. H2 has around 300% more energy/kg, so the delta isn’t that big, and solar will only close the gap. Still not seeing how to build cryo tanks (fuel temp circa -275°). Still not understanding how big the fuel cells have to be to make enough electricity to run at cruise, assuming batteries will provide take-off power.
I am all in on the leftie agenda of reducing the carbon footprint. Just not seeing it for aviation, at least not where almost all the Jet A-1 is consumed.
At this stage it is virtue signalling, as already suggested. Since Rex is allergic to advertising, this might be a ploy for free press coverage.
H2 has around 300% more energy/kg, so the delta isn’t that big, and solar will only close the gap. Still not seeing how to build cryo tanks (fuel temp circa -275°)..
H2 has around 300% more energy/kg, so the delta isn’t that big, and solar will only close the gap. Still not seeing how to build cryo tanks (fuel temp circa -275°)..
lol you all sound like a bunch of old fossils bemoaning the introduction of steam power. Pointing out basic fundamentals as if they haven’t occurred to the engineers, designers and airline people.
This kind of stuff is probably the future. Keep up or get left behind old codgers!
This kind of stuff is probably the future. Keep up or get left behind old codgers!
Henry Ford had to develop the Model T...........for us to have the Toyota Corolla of today.
I imagine electric airliners will have the same timespan of development.
Research has to start somewhere - but we must ignore wishful timelines.
I imagine electric airliners will have the same timespan of development.
Research has to start somewhere - but we must ignore wishful timelines.
The doubters here are all arguing based on today's technology. Payload issues, range - who says an electric propulsion system a decade from now will be bulky and heavy, who says it won't come with good range capability. That's what R and D does. Lamax made assumptions based on what's out there now. And he/she is correct - wouldn't work now. And that's why they are not doing it now. But give it time, money, R and D, and it will happen. I might be dead when it does, but I can see it coming.
The doubters here are all arguing based on today's technology. Payload issues, range - who says an electric propulsion system a decade from now will be bulky and heavy, who says it won't come with good range capability. That's what R and D does. Lamax made assumptions based on what's out there now. And he/she is correct - wouldn't work now. And that's why they are not doing it now. But give it time, money, R and D, and it will happen. I might be dead when it does, but I can see it coming.
Hydrogen, either through fuel cells or by burning it, is a possibility, but as cars aren't headed in that direction, it means an entire infrastructure just for aviation- not going to happen soon.
It'll be interesting to see if Rex really has the capital, financial or otherwise, for this sort of adventure. Talk is much cheaper, less risky and still gets headlines.
My two cents - this proposal, as it stands, will never get off the ground.
Unfortunatly there's not much R&D going on toward increasing energy density. Current batteries are fine for what was always going to be the largest market- land vehicles, so the impetus is toward lower cost and faster charging. It would take a step-change in energy density to levels not currently even theoretically possible to make battery powered commercial aircraft practical, and no-one is really working towards it.
Hydrogen, either through fuel cells or by burning it, is a possibility, but as cars aren't headed in that direction, it means an entire infrastructure just for aviation- not going to happen soon.
Hydrogen, either through fuel cells or by burning it, is a possibility, but as cars aren't headed in that direction, it means an entire infrastructure just for aviation- not going to happen soon.
They are striving for increased range in electric cars, obviously with the same or smaller batteries, this will have flow on effects for aviation
The cost of a 100kg battery pack for a car verses say 500kg now will likely be less and as they continue to reduce battery weights for cars and trucks, again, this will flow to aviation
You understand that part of the range issue with car and truck batteries (along with aviation) is the weight of the batteries....
Cost will drive innovation
They are striving for increased range in electric cars, obviously with the same or smaller batteries, this will have flow on effects for aviation
The cost of a 100kg battery pack for a car verses say 500kg now will likely be less and as they continue to reduce battery weights for cars and trucks, again, this will flow to aviation
You understand that part of the range issue with car and truck batteries (along with aviation) is the weight of the batteries....
They are striving for increased range in electric cars, obviously with the same or smaller batteries, this will have flow on effects for aviation
The cost of a 100kg battery pack for a car verses say 500kg now will likely be less and as they continue to reduce battery weights for cars and trucks, again, this will flow to aviation
You understand that part of the range issue with car and truck batteries (along with aviation) is the weight of the batteries....
The technology requirements of road transport and aviation diverge at some point, and that divergence is meaning the research isn't helping aviation.
The simple math is that a 2 tonne car has gone from 60KG of fuel to a 500KG battery- an increase of 20% or so.
An aircraft may have 30% of its TOW as fuel- increase THAT by a fatcor of 8.....
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Here and there....currently here.
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
3 Posts
No mention anywhere of Saab AB as the Type Certificate holder being onboard with this. This isn't just a case of slapping in a new power plant, but the airframe will require extensive modification to carry the batteries and associated management systems, indeed is the airframe capable of carrying all this? All the airframe load paths will change as the wings, I presume, will be empty if batteries are in the fuselage, so wing to fuselage structure, and undercarriage, will need significant changes as well. Hope the parties concerned have plenty experience around Supplementary Type Certificate management, or would this get to the point where the differences would need a new Type Certificate?
I reckon it would be a new type certificate Tom. The changes will not be minor/immaterial or insignificant. They will be huge, as you have pointed out. Can’t see it happening personally. The only way to accommodate the batteries is to design it from the ground up.
The doubters here are all arguing based on today's technology. Payload issues, range - who says an electric propulsion system a decade from now will be bulky and heavy, who says it won't come with good range capability. That's what R and D does. Lamax made assumptions based on what's out there now. And he/she is correct - wouldn't work now. And that's why they are not doing it now. But give it time, money, R and D, and it will happen. I might be dead when it does, but I can see it coming.
Rio Tinto and FMG are buying battery-electric locomotives right now as a trial and assuming the batteries themselves work (the core loco electrics are well-proven), can see them being particularly successful given the vertical profile of the track there, and while there's not a significant weight constraint in that application, the research and ongoing development is what will translate across to aviation uses. Even in heavy-rail use, a lighter battery means more can be carried for a given axle-load, increasing either range or available traction power, so there is most definitely an incentive for GE or EMD to continue their own R&D.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The FA's on my flights say that their worst nightmare is a mobile phone battery exploding and creating a small intense fire. Imagine sitting on top of 10 tons of batteries!! https://www.flightglobal.com/airfram...141228.article
The FA's on my flights say that their worst nightmare is a mobile phone battery exploding and creating a small intense fire. Imagine sitting on top of 10 tons of batteries!! https://www.flightglobal.com/airfram...141228.article
